Do I understand the questions about negotiation?

The situation -

Several months ago, Jerome Smith was involved in an automobile accident with Rachel O'Roark.

The accident happened at 2:30 a.m., and Jerome had been drinking at a local tavern. Rachel, a registered nurse, had just finished her shift at a nearby hospital. The roads were slick due to a thundershower that had recently passed through the area. Although Jerome was uninjured, Rachel received a dislocated shoulder that could impact her work as a nurse.

Jerome did not want the civil side of the accident to be litigated. He had the money to make Rachel a nice settlement. When Jerome telephoned Rachel, she refused to talk to him. He then hired Cynthia Chang to represent him.

Cynthia telephoned Rachel to try to set up a meeting. Rachel informed Cynthia that she had turned her case over to Roland White, an attorney.

Cynthia then telephoned Roland. His secretary informed Cynthia that Roland was "out of the office" and would not be back for several days. Cynthia left a message for Roland to call her about the O'Roark/Smith case. A week passed and no call from Roland. Another week passed and no call from Roland. Cynthia called again and this time was able to speak with Roland who informed her that he was in the middle of a big trial and could not meet with her for another three weeks. Roland proposed a time and place for the meeting and Cynthia agreed.

-------------------------

Questions to be answered -

What rules of negotiation are being negotiated?

Are the rules being explicitly or implicitly negotiated?

When did the negotiation begin?

What impact can these rules have on the outcome of the negotiation?

-------------------------

My answer -

The main problem or dispute in this situation has been identified by both Jerome Smith and Rachel O'Roark; however, it is possible that undetected problems or disputes may arise during the negotiation process. The dispute commenced when Mr. Smith drove in wet conditions while intoxicated, on some level. Due to these reasons, he hit Ms. O'Roark's car, causing her shoulder to become dislocated and thus affecting her ability to work. Mr. Smith began the negotiation efforts when he phoned Ms. O'Roark, offering her a nice settlement, even though she refused to talk to him. Subsequently, they both hired attorneys to represent them.

After many back and forth phone calls, Roland White, Ms. O'Roark's attorney, and Ms. Cynthia Chang, Mr. Smith's attorney, are still in the preparation stage of negotiation. They are currently negotiating the rule of preparation. More than likely, before Ms. Chang and Mr. White meet in person to discuss the matter, they will speak to their clients about "the negotiation process, the fact that not all negotiations end in settlement, the necessity to keep an open mind and expect to compromise, and what they will do if the negotiations fail to produce a settlement" (Frey, 2001). At this point, Ms. Chang and Mr. White are not negotiating explicitly. Clarity and details are not a part of the process currently, leaving room for uncertainty. They are negotiating in an implicit manner due to Mr. White's lack of communication and availability.

Should Mr. Smith and Ms. O'Roark be present at the proposed meeting and have an active role, the attorneys will prepare them beforehand in regards to what they should say or what they should not say and how to conduct themselves. Thereafter, they will 1) further discuss the rules and regulations, 2) the application of the rules, regulations and laws, 3) evaluate the non-legal issues, 4) understand the motivating factors, and 5) determine if the matter can be resolved through negotiation (Robertson, 2012).

The outcome in negotiation is determined by the parties involved and is based more on the needs and interests of the parties than on law (Frey, 2001). Based on the rules, various outcomes of this negotiation could include the solution meeting or not meeting the interests of either Ms. O'Roark or Mr. Smith. Should negotiation go well, the agreement could produce immediate results and resolve the dispute (Frey, 2001). This is optimal because it would save time as well as legal costs and fees. However, if the negotiation does not go well, an agreement will not be produced and a different dispute resolution process, such as litigation, may be implemented. This process could cost the parties a significant amount of money. Thus, a successful negotiation process is the better outcome for both parties.

THANKS!! :)